Avatar

PuckLuck_77

Member Since
Mar. 7, 2019
Favourite Team
Los Angeles Kings
Forum Posts
1735
Posts per Day
1.2
Forum: Armchair-GMYesterday at 11:50 a.m.
Thread: Preds Deadline
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>gmgb</b></div><div>All NSH fans (and a couple very vocal TOR fans) are both going to decline the Jeannot-Sandin trade vociferously.

That Petersen contract is a back breaker for a backup/AHL goalie. No thanks.</div></div>

The Peterson contract isn't all that bad when you look at it deeper. It's tough for the 23-24 season, but the way Blake had it structured means the buyout after that is extremely minimal. Just 2mil the first year, and 1mil the second year (or vice versa, I can't remember which). That's why I don't think the Kings need to pay a premium to 'dump' him. They'll deal with a 3.8mil cap hit next year after burying him in the AHL if he's still struggling, and then buy him out the year after. The Kings aren't in a massive cap crunch, and they can stomach the cost. So would any team that's looking to rebuild and not contend/spend to the cap next year.
Forum: Armchair-GMYesterday at 10:32 a.m.
Thread: Screw it
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>OldBoisClubSandwich</b></div><div>Bjorn and Grans have very little value and a late 2nd only slightly more

so ya, have a premium dman with several years of retention</div></div>

Why do Bjorn and Grans have little value? One's a former first round pick who hasn't done anything to go against that selection and also has over 100 games of experience before he turned 21. The other is a developing 2nd round pick with a really good two-way game and size to go with it. There is certainly good value there.

Not saying this trade value matches what Ekholm with retention would cost, nor is it the package that LA would likely offer (they need left D-men, so why would they trade out Bjornfot?). But it's got significantly more value than you're insinuating.
Forum: Armchair-GMTue. at 1:30 p.m.
Thread: Contenders
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Userunknown</b></div><div>Bridge deal.

And if he is valuable enough to get the contract you are implying than he is worth far more than that garbage return.

If Boston were to trade Swayman for a defenseman his name would be Chychrun. Not a stiff whose ceiling is a #5 with a couple of picks that won’t amount to anything.

<strong>Bjornfjort would be 6th or 7th in the org depth chart for LD</strong>.</div></div>

I mean that's just not true. Bjornfot immediately becomes the best LD prospect in Boston's pipeline and (speaking from experience of someone who watched a ton of Derek Forbort), is already about there in terms of being able to replace Derek on the left. Toby plays a different game than Forbort, though, so it doesn't necessarily fit the role that Forbort plays. But dismissing a former 1st round pick who's close to being a top-4 D, a 2nd, and a 3rd as a "garbage return" for a goalie who has a total of 70 games of experience behind the best defense in the league is over-reactionary.

For the record, I also don't think this trade works for either team. But let's not go saying the value isn't there. The 2nd round pick would need to be brought in well closer to the present time than 2025, but the base of the ingredients looks about right. The pieces just don't work for the individual teams (LA needs LD, so won't be trading one out. It's much more likely they'd deal from their stable of RD).
Forum: Armchair-GMMon. at 3:58 p.m.
Thread: Keeping Timo
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>T0R</b></div><div>I seriously don’t understand what is so far fetched here, Roy is an expiring UFA with 1 year left &amp; so is Brodie, 1.575 is literal peanuts to retain. Brodie can play Left or Right &amp; is a premier Shutdown RD, his defensive metrics are phenomenal &amp; he again has 1 year left while fitting an express need for the Kings at LD.

Also according to every graph or piece of data in existence, MATT ROY IS NOT BETTER DEFENSIVELY THAN TJ BRODIE


Why is this so far fetched?, It makes sense both ways &amp; you can most likely sign Roy after the Year is up so why are you so upset, Leafs can go trade for a guy like McCabe at 50% if your panties are in that massive of a bunch from this, I believe several teams will be interested in Brodie if he were to hit the market so it’s a matter of finding a suitor &amp; getting a cheaper rental D-man back in the 2-3 mil range</div></div>

Go ahead and trade for Jake McCabe then, that's no skin off my back. I just simply pointed out why the Kings wouldn't do it from their point of view.

I'm at work, so I'm trying to look up some evolving hockey graphs to compare stats and it's going slow. My opinion on Roy being better is admittedly off of the eye-ball test as opposed to factual data. I'm curious to see what the numbers look like, with the automatic caveat that Toronto is a much better team than LA currently, so their numbers are going to look better overall.

Outside of the "better" argument, the other points are factual. Roy is younger, more cost effective, and actually healthy. All reasons why he currently would have more value, and especially reasons why the Kings wouldn't retain just to help Toronto fit in a player so they could be harder to beat. That's not how teams operate.

I'll give you that Brodie's a lefty and the Kings need a lefty. But they aren't trading Roy for him. If Brodie gets healthy and shows he's still playing up to a certain standard, maybe the Kings would entertain Sean Walker for him 1-for-1, no retention anywhere, if none of their other options pan out. That's the best you're getting from LA.
Forum: Armchair-GMJan. 20 at 5:40 p.m.
Thread: Trade Proposal with Big Prospects
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>littlejerryseinfeld</b></div><div>There's a whole standard deviation of player in between Clarke and sanderson</div></div>

In terms of type of player, maybe. I don't think in terms of value, though. Again, that's my personal opinion. But both are extremely highly rated draft picks that are on a path to become their team's #1D. One is one year ahead of the other because he was drafted a year earlier. And there's nothing to suggest Clarke is behind his development when compared to where Sanderson was last year. In actuality, Clarke pushed for a spot on the Kings defense before Sanderson did Ottawa's with both getting their first NHL games this year. So I don't really get where the massive value spike is between the two, outside of fan bias.
Forum: Armchair-GMJan. 20 at 5:34 p.m.
Thread: Just Fired Dorion
First of all, Roy isn't being traded because he's too important to the make-up of the Kings current defense. He's criminally underrated in the capfriendly world outside of the LA fanbase because numbers trump everything when you don't know much about a player, and producing numbers is not his job. But for the sake of conversation:

LA wouldn't accept anything less than a 1st + another good asset for Roy. He's their best defensive D-man not named Doughty, and he and Mikey Anderson are the only ones that can consistently eat minutes currently. Its why the Kings are looking for another piece for their blue line to pair with him. For the price of a 2nd, the Kings would move Sean Walker because he's replaceable with the prospects they have in the pipeline. With LA moving Faber out for Fiala, there's no current replacement for the type of minutes Roy provides in the King's system. So, Roy is going to be more expensive than most think if they want to pry him out of LA.
Forum: Armchair-GMJan. 20 at 5:12 p.m.
Thread: Trade Proposal with Big Prospects
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Neptune12</b></div><div>I understand your way of thinking and how good it would be for your team to do that swap, However This season Sanderson established himself as a very good top 4 D while Clarke still needs to prove it. Ottawa would fix the RD issue they have but would open up another issue on the Left side. so

1. Sanderson has more value than Clarke at the moment because he's proven.
2. The Sens would create a new hole in their lineup.
3. I don't think you want to do that RD are the most valuable assets in the league rn You should hold onto him.
4. Clarke is a stud and you might regret that in a couple years. He's from Ottawa every NHL player from Ottawa turns into a stud the Level of hockey here is unparalleled. Just look at Mctavish those 2 are the same age and both played AAA hockey in the region.
5. Because Clarke isn't established as a full time nhler I could see PD asking for a second asset in return.</div></div>

1) Agreed.
2) That's kind of what I was trying to figure out and it's good to hear from a fan who follows the fanbase. The word I've read is Dorion is looking for a RD. I don't know how true that is, and I also didn't know how much of a hole would be created with Sanderson being moved since Chabot is still an absolute stud that is only 25.
3) At some point the Kings will need to trade from a position of strength. With Doughty, Roy, Walker, Spence, Durzi and Grans, RD is the area of strength. Clarke is the best prospect among them, but would be worth moving if a guy of Sanderson's caliber came back. And since both are extremely highly touted...... I figured Clarke's name would be the only one worth mentioning if bringing up Sanderson.
4) Agreed, I'm really looking forward to Clarke's development.
5) Yeah, I agree. Trades like this are so hard to imagine and price out, but there would absolutely need to be something else going to Ottawa simply due to current status. They aren't TOO far apart in my opinion, but Sanderson is the more valuable for sure.
Forum: Armchair-GMJan. 20 at 4:48 p.m.
Thread: Trade Proposal with Big Prospects
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>csick</b></div><div>The thing that I want to tell you is that you’re wasting prospects in the minors anyways. Once a forward reaches like 22 and a Dman like 23 and they’re still not in the AHL , they start to lose value. So guys Kupari, ****emo, JAD, Turcotte (soon), etc their time is now. You’re already stacked on forwards and on D as well.

Let’s assume you keep everyone except Walker next year on D. That leaves Anderson, Doughty , Durzi, Spence, Clarke, Bjornfot, Roy, you could even get a 3LD in free agency. Subbing one of your D for Chychrun at the expense of a forward prospect that doesn’t have room to play and a 1st isnt a big ask. You just can’t keep all your prospects , eventually you gotta do a big deal. And the time is now for LA to do that</div></div>

I don't necessarily disagree with the thought process. One of my most vocal gripes with LA has been that it takes them FOREVER to churn out prospects, and even when they are ready Blake blocks their progress with tweeners like Lizotte, Lemieux, Grundstrom, and even to an extent Arvidsson. Their development process is slow to the point of detrimental. However, teams like the Rangers are on the opposite side of the spectrum. I wish LA would find a nice middle ground.

I also don't necessarily agree with "the time is now", however. As seen by their goaltending, LA isn't just a Chychrun away from contending for the Cup. There are holes on this roster and just moving big pieces because they are getting close to 22/23 might not be the smartest move.

And by the way, I appreciate the candid conversation. This is exactly what I was hoping for.